Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

I wouldn't bet any money at all that NO Japanese martial art ever used "silk reeling", David. Research will most likely turn up some damned Koryu that actually has some in it.

Well, that's what I said. Unless someone can show me a Japanese art that uses silk reeling....

I've read down the messages and I saw your reference to Okinawan karate, though we all know that that comes directly from China. On the other hand, look how far it has come from China. In just a couple of centuries it is quite different from the Chinese arts. And that's not really Japan, where the katana was the real rule and everything else was both subordinate and tailored to fit within that sword culture.

Again, not saying It's entirely different or unrelated. The ancient warlords of Japan used I Ching and refered to Sun Tzu, after all.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

You are wrong about the silk reeling in Japanese arts. As a private exercise it was thee very first thing I learned in DR. And I have had two masters of taiji tell me I was in fact doing a type of silk reeling "according to them."

Well, is it "in" daito ryu itself, or was this a personal skill that the particular teacher had developed, incorporated into his DR and showed you? I ask because I don't know if you got this lesson from Tokimune Takeda or from whom. Mochizuki Sensei used a lot of boxing methods, but we wouldn't ordinarily say that boxing is "in" aikido. So I ask.

Quote:

Dan Harden wrote:

I respect the way you play man-But I think you don't have a clue what I'm talking about.

No, I don't. That's why I keep responding and keep working toward meeting with you. I want to know what you're doing and how you're doing it, based on what people have described.

Quote:

Dan Harden wrote:

Lets wait till we get together, mess around, shoot the breeze, talk budo crap and have fun. I'm bettin you are going to go what the hell? How did you do that? And...I'll show ya. I have no vested interest in being right or wrong I really don't give a crap. It's not a question of needing, or wanting to be right. I'll show you what I know.

Sounds great and it is my aim. Looking forward to it.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

Yeah. That's why I always wonder why you want to say my ideas about child movement are wrong, but you can't come up with any actual reason.

That's just not true. I've spent pages discussing this with you. I even went so far as to critique video of you running around your toddler. The terms you are using simply do not mean what I mean when I use them, so we're left with no where to go. No one can fault me for not trying to get my point across to you. You have defined the root of aiki as avoidance (a child's resistance to being taken by an adult). I do not feel this is a reflection in the slightest of what aiki is. Further, I feel the 'root' of any art can only be traced back to the point where it is differentiated from other arts/kinds of movement, therefore a 'root' of aiki, must be more than efficient skeletal movement. You have a bold theory, the next step would be vetting that theory. Can you teach this to your students and training partners? This is my last post on toddler aikido, I promise.

Christian,
Would you please describe the differences between your variety of ikkyo and the "standard aikikai variety of ikkyo?"

This is the short version, I'm leaving out a lot, if we ever hook-up I'd be glad to expand on it. For clarity, let's talk about a left hand shomenuchi attack from uke. The most obvious external differences would be the placement of nage's right hand behind/under the deltoid instead at the elbow, and then the blocking of uke's left hip with our right hip (almost in position for uchi mata). Other differences would be the way we enter, amount (or lack) of blending, straighter lines of movement, and which muscle groups are being used to transmit force and stabilize the body, but that quickly gets too complicated to talk about online. When I still did Aikido, if I did this version in class, the instructors would frequently try and correct how uke was taking ukemi because if you do it right their feet 'feel' stuck to the ground and it looks like they're not moving enough. What I was doing looked similar enough they often mistook it for something uke was doing wrong to make them fall and move awkwardly, but it wasn't. I'd usually back off so that they could go back to falling normally. Hopefully that gives you at least an idea.

Christian,
Other than nage's hand placement, this sounds very much like "standard aikikai ikkyo." I really don't like to get too attached to the exact location of nage's hand placement as long as it controls uke's center. It kinda sounds like you are simply entering a little deeper and more directly than others you have trained with.
Thanks for explaining.
Do you like to give an atemi to the exposed ribcage on your version?

Christian,
Other than nage's hand placement, this sounds very much like "standard aikikai ikkyo." I really don't like to get too attached to the exact location of nage's hand placement as long as it controls uke's center. It kinda sounds like you are simply entering a little deeper and more directly than others you have trained with.
Thanks for explaining.
Do you like to give an atemi to the exposed ribcage on your version?

Like I said, that was a very superficial description of what's different. One of the things that is different is that we feel the hand placement is very important. There isn't really an atemi opportunity to the ribcage in this version, at least not the way you're talking about.

Well, is it "in" Daito ryu itself, or was this a personal skill that the particular teacher had developed, incorporated into his DR and showed you? I ask because I don't know if you got this lesson from Tokimune Takeda or from whom. Mochizuki Sensei used a lot of boxing methods, but we wouldn't ordinarily say that boxing is "in" aikido. So I ask. David

Anyone who has spent time in a certain lines of DR know the admonition about growing through the skin in a grab. They have also seen the exercise of softly maintaining skin contact. You were never meant to push through the skin-like many do in Kokyu-ho or aiki-age. You're supposed to inflate into the hand. It is also where the Daito ryu term "breath power" comes from. Its a difference that is substantial and years apart from doing other things that you can learn to do much faster. You can be shown, but unless you spend years doing inventive and creative imagery work and working your body through it....nothing will come of it. Its the same with guys and gals who were shown Kokyu-ho or aiki-age, then spent the rest of their careers doing aiki with their hands rotating and moving around their pinkies or thumbs. You'll get people to move -to a point- but it aint it.
In all these arts we can wonder whether the real questions are do folks get shown- but didn't get it? Didn't do the work? Didn't know how to get creative and and then doggedly pursue it? Or, were simply not shown the real stuff and were just more grist for the mill in creating and sustaining organizations. We all see so many people in various organizations, of all types, who are there every week and are nice folks-but they don't get it-then others who are creative and really woking it and getting results here and there. That very same focus can be applied to things other than "techniques." How else does one explain Sagawa yellin at his own men- telling them they have to "think" and work or they would never "get it." Gee, what does that mean? There was something outside of kata to....get? And other ways for it to BE gotten
Say it isn't so.......kata isn't enough? What?

Sagawa:

Quote:

Training must be done EVERYDAY for the rest of your life. That is the meaning of “Shugyo.” No matter how much muscle you think you aren’t using (you’re only misleading yourself.) The true execution of Aiki requires an enormous amount of solo training to condition the body (Tanren). It is not easy to attain.
You won’t be able to manifest Aiki unless you continue tanren of the body everyday for decades. You must train the body, ponder and have the techniques “seep out” from the body itself. Even if you train everyday all the while changing yourself, it will take at least 20 years. Ten years or so isn’t nearly enough time.
Your body has to truly be ready; otherwise no matter what you do you won’t be able to do “Aiki.”
Most people would probably recoil if they knew what my training regimen consisted of.

Kimura has been training (tanren) on his own, so his lower back and legs are becoming different than others <around him.> I don’t often talk about how to train the body, but when I do mention it, Kimura goes out and does it. You can’t stop after two or three years. You must continue this and use it to change yourself everyday for the rest of your life.
<Author> “I thought it was impossible to change the body after you pass your thirties.”
<Sagawa> “That is not true. Your body will develop muscle until you’re seventy. Once you build such a body, your body will not falter or deteriorate even after you’re eighty

Takeda, and Sagawa, tossing judoka around when in they were in ther 80's. Takeda doing so uninvited and while insulting the Judo guys. Not my kind of guy. But his skills were certainly real and lasted him throughout his life. Apparently there is something going on outside of muscle use and further it can be "had" outside of kata.

Most people have an amazing amount of slack in their bodies. Slack, by the way, is not to be confused with relaxation. It is easily revealed in wall work. One thing we do. is a training exercise where you learn to hold certain things together while you make pressure on the wall with a single hand while having the body in a relaxed and swimming fashion. You then have to switch feet and maintain that pressure on the single hand while you "add" the other hand with no noticeable change in pressure on the first hand. Then with both hands on the wall (with equal pressure) you start to move your feet and change your body angle and position. Anyone can "copy" the movement and mimic me. When I get them to start to feel it, all of a sudden they stop and realize the trouble and difficulty they are now facing.

Interestingly enough, I have a lot of things I say about "slack", yet they have little to do what Dan is talking about. It would be one of those situations where it would be very easy to talk at cross-purposes if it came up in a discussion. I.e., it's worth being careful to ascertain of terminology is coinciding in a lot of these discussions or whether it's misleading.

Er...No. To me thats more or less framework. What I would show someone new to all this- day one. A straight, stretched posture doesn't play as big a part later. I am thinking more of eminating out from center, and pushing/following/pulling a facial chain throughout the body. To folks it feels flexible and feels rigid and at the same time remaining sensitive. And the breath (in/yo ho) has a lot to do with it. Its far more difficult then basic aiki-age, jin/kokyu framework you describe. I was surprised to hear a term "full" from a Chinese teacher. And it is good term for breathwork. From discussions I have had with Rob what I do is different from what he does. Slack is a difficult concept. There are any number of ways folks display it in movement. But stretching out-and using spine-work- while fine- is but a first step. A good one- but only one. I think there are other things to focus on. Honestly I think they're deeper things..

er...No. to me thats more or less framework. What I would show someone new to all this- day one.

Really? Then you are far better than me at teaching.

What you described about "slack" would be more what I would consider jin-mechanics, since jin has to do with forces and the "structure", as you're calling it, has to do with the ability to transmit forces. Keeping a force while changing feet, keeping the body relaxed, etc., is, in my viewpoint, more to do with jin, since it involves forces.

Quote:

A straight, stretched posture doesn't play as big a part at all later. I am thinking more of eminating out from center, and pushing/following/pulling a facial chain throughout the body. To be flexible and feel rigid at the same time remaining sensitive. And the breath (in/yo ho) has a lot to do with it. Its far more difficult then basic aiki-age, jin/kokyu framework you describe. From discussions I have had with Rob what I do is different from what he does. Slack is a difficult concept. There are any number of ways folks display it in movement. But stretching out-and using spine-work- while fine- is but a first step. A good one- but only one. I think there are other things to focus on. Honestly I think they're deeper things..

Well, like I said, there are some terminology differences. My comment was simply to point out that "slack" was something I sometimes talk about, but that it means something different than what you described... which is more about jin-mechanics to me.

My comment was simply to point out that "slack" was something I sometimes talk about, but that it means something different than what you described... which is more about jin-mechanics to me.

Regards,

Mike

Seems to me you're on frame, posture and stretching out. Which is fine. It involves tendon/ fascia too. I am far more concerned with slack in fascia and breathwork.as a continuous pliable current throughout the body and mainpulated in the body for a sense of "fullness" as a friend would say. The spine and framework connections is fine, but I'll take the mass of the center connected to everything else. Funny, other then showing new guys I don't think much about force vectors in what I am concentrating on right now. It takes care of itself. Oh well, I don't do Chinese stuff or know how they train.
See ya

Seems to me you're on frame, posture and stretching out. Which is fine. It involves tendon/ fascia too. I am far more concerned with slack in fascia and breathwork.as a continuous pliable current throughout the body and mainpulated in the body for a sense of "fullness" as a friend would say. The spine and framework connections is fine, but I'll take the mass of the center connected to everything else. Funny, other then showing new guys I don't think much about force vectors in what I am concentrating on right now. It takes care of itself. Oh well, I don't do Chinese stuff or know how they train.

So, are you doing Japanese stuff and that's how they train? Where did you learn this Japanese approach? You've got "fascia", like I've talked about on the internet for a decade or so, you've got stuff like Akuzawa's, and so on. Who did you learn this stuff from?

So, are you doing Japanese stuff and that's how they train? Where did you learn this Japanese approach? You've got "fascia", like I've talked about on the internet for a decade or so, you've got stuff like Akuzawa's, and so on. Who did you learn this stuff from?

Regards,

Mike Sigman

I have had two great teachers-Japanese. No one teaches this stuff openly anywhere I have seen. It's 100% Japanese and a whole lot of my personal dogged -and some have told me obssesive-research (read- failure) added to it for a very long time. With a small group fo people training with me for up to 14 years.

Ark .
Well, Rob and any one of those who have trained with him will tell you I don't do his stuff. It's different. I borrowed two of his exercises and even that I do differently. I also asked him if I coud borrow one of his tests which I do differently as well. Mine is harder to pull off...for me... against men pushing in hanmi. There are or should be enough men-I think 5, who have trained with them who will tell you I don't do what they do.
Alluding that I "borrowed" fascia from you on the net is erroneous. I talked about it 11 years ago on the Aikido list when a certain teacher kept calling it "long muscle" till someone pried the meaning out of him-fascia. By the way it appeared on Aikido journal from another Japanese -Daito ryu- related teacher. I was reading along and there it was again "Long muscle." You coined "ground path" I learned it as "current", you have "chi", I learned it as "breath-power" or "in/yo ho." But, as I said on many lists recently I love some of the new terminology, its very convenient.
Your stuff
I keep hearing the Chinese stuff is different and very good. In a wierd enounter I made frends with a master level teacher who asked me to come stay with him at his house in China and train. So I may find out someday.
See ya

Yeah, but that's aside from the point. You're saying in an earlier message (and others seem to like the idea, too) that there is a "Chinese" approach that is somehow different from the "Japanese" approach. I'm asking where you get that idea. For instance, the oldest available transcripts in China about qi and jin training refer to the "connective tissue" or "fascia", depending upon how you want to translate it. If you're trying to categorize people as somehow doing a "Chinese thing" while you're doing a "Japanese thing", why not clarify how you arrive at that conclusion and who (Japanese) taught you. If you're "borrowing things" from people, for instance, Akuzawa, maybe you should be clear how what he does absolutely represents a "Japanese" approach -- as distinguished from a "Chinese" approach -- and so on. As I understand it, Akuzawa doesn't really differentiate between "Japanese" and "Chinese". I don't either, and I've made that clear a number of times, as you'll see in the archives.

BTW.... can you point me to where you mentioned the fascia topics before? And I'm happy that people have politely invited you to come visit and train with them... it's a nice gesture often seen in Asian politesse.

Yeah, but that's aside from the point. You're saying in an earlier message (and others seem to like the idea, too) that there is a "Chinese" approach that is somehow different from the "Japanese" approach. I'm asking where you get that idea.

No I am not. I said I "hear" the Chinese internal method is different. Which is my new line. I'm sick of saying they are or share similar methods. So instead I'll say "I hear they are different."
I have serious doubts that it can be so.
So far I see direct match ups with so many things that I think they are amazingly alike. But everytime and everywhere I mention it I get my head bit off. So the hell with it. Let the folks who don't have much of a clue anyway think they know and stumble around content. More and more I am talking with my guys and thinking of going back to being a hermit. Who needs the grief,

You-not me- are the one stating they are the same here. Which implies experience in both enough to know. Yet you -not me- have had to correct yourself and state -even recently-that you found somethings in the JMA that were a "surprise" to you.
So you are the one who gets to be "surprised."
I state, openly that I don't know the CMA.
Thats it, and thats all.
I stated "my" skills were Japanese. As -I-have made clear.
I borrowed two forms from Ark that I do differently to suit my needs. I will NOT talk about how it compares to Chinese arts. Why would I?
Apparently it might have about as much validity as you talking about the Koryu.

Quote:

Mike Sigman wrote:

And I'm happy that people have politely invited you to come visit and train with them... it's a nice gesture often seen in Asian politesse.
Regards,
Mike Sigman

gees... quit already will ya
Why do I get to appreciate yet another unsolicited insult. Just couldn't help yourself eh? This time to my professional and martial experience, and for diminishing both my age and abilties to handle myself with Asian teachers. Thanks for the advice that "Teachers can be disenengouos." Wow what a revelation. You don't say?
Here's some advice for you:
You...weren't there and don't have clue as to what you are talking about., But thanks just the same. I might have needed it twenty years ago.

No I am not. I said I "hear" the Chinese internal method is different. Which is my new line. I'm sick of saying they are or share similar methods. So instead I'll say "I hear they are different."
I have serious doubts that it can be so.

Then why bother with the distinction? Logically, if you understand the Japanese ki paradigm and that it comes from the Chinese qi paradigm and everything follows a straightforward set of relationships, the idea that the physical manifestations in Chinese and Japanese martial arts is somehow different simply doesn't fly.

Quote:

You-not me- are the one stating they are the same here. Which implies experience in both enough to know. Yet you -not me- have had to correct yourself and state -even recently-that you found somethings in the JMA that were a "surprise" to you.

I do. I do. And no, I only said that the depth surprises me, so you're mischaracterizing what I said. Again.

Quote:

Apparently it might have about as much validity as you talking about the Koryu.

Do you seriously think that the "Koryu" know something special about training ki and kokyu-power skills that is different from the known basics? Other than special techniques, mental mindsets, focus on various skills within the qi and jin parameters, I don't know of anything that makes the "Koryu" any different than "Uncle Joe's take on swordsmanship and jujitsu". That's the nice thing about these skills... it suddenly brings the Asian martial arts together. For someone to smugly brag about his "koryu secrets" is sort of a point of humour.

So enough of the distractions from the question I asked. Are you representing that some Japanese teacher taught you ki and kokyu skills and that's why you're distinguishing "Chinese" from Japanese? I don't have any trouble understanding the terminology and concepts of Tohei, Inaba, Abe, and others, but your take with your "slack" and other concepts seems to be different from any Japanese descriptions I've ever heard. I was just curious why you bothered to bring up the "Chinese" and "Japanese" dichotomy.

Yes I am stating I learned it from Japanese sources
Yes I think the JMA and CMA internal methods are inexorabably intertwined.
The joke was that
a. I am sick of stating they share most things so
b. I am stating they MUST be different.
Which meant I could avoid being surprised like you were about the Japanese Koryu-a joke.

No I don't think the Koryu have a leg up.In fact I am on record of stating the opposite If you go back a year ago I told you -I- was surprised when I saw shared terminology, like "listening" and breath-power and even some of the same expressions in movement. Sorry but peng jin -IS- Aiki age. I thought "I was mistaken all those years when I thought my training was unique in all the world." I said that on aikido journal before I got disgusted and removed all my most posts and I said it here and on E-budo. Overal this is just a huge time waster to keep trying to convince people who either don't care or decidedly DO NOT want to know and then get ticked -off.. The hell with it.

I didn't bring up the Chinese method except to say a teacher I know was listening to me describe what I was doing and he used the word "full" which I jumped on! It was perfect for what I was trying to say. It is part of the breathing of in/yo ho. Every other referrence to things "Chinese" came from you.
What I don't get is we have been discussing my way as being different from the framework, stretched method you use. I don't do that except to teach new guys some basics to midlevel stuff.
But now you just swtiched and told me what -I- am doing is Chinese.
But it isn't what you are doing....
which is a background in Chinese arts...
My head hurts.

Notice how I can be confused and not understand your point- as it sounds fishy- and yet still not insult you.
Take a hint.

You have defined the root of aiki as avoidance (a child's resistance to being taken by an adult). I do not feel this is a reflection in the slightest of what aiki is.

Chris, are you deliberately forgetting how many times I have quoted Minoru Mochizuki's exact definition of aiki? "aikiis the ura of kiai."

I have never defined aiki as "avoidance," but I have said that children useaiki when they avoid an adult's trying to control them. Avoidance, itself, is not necessarily aiki but it can employaiki. In the child's case, they use the ura of the adult's strength by going instinctively to its weakest point without having to be taught how to find that weakness. They know inately because it is part of the human nervous system.

Quote:

Christian Moses wrote:

Further, I feel the 'root' of any art can only be traced back to the point where it is differentiated from other arts/kinds of movement, therefore a 'root' of aiki, must be more than efficient skeletal movement.

It has little to do with skeletal movement and everything to do with the instinctive use of the weakest part of an adult's efforts.

Quote:

Christian Moses wrote:

You have a bold theory, the next step would be vetting that theory.

That's why I post on it on these fora. Mostly, I find that people read part of my statements and then only to find something to object to, focussing their replies on that willfully-partial understanding of what I've said. No matter. Many other people have come in with their own observations of children's naturally displaying aiki movement.

Quote:

Christian Moses wrote:

Can you teach this to your students and training partners?

Yes.

Quote:

Christian Moses wrote:

This is my last post on toddler aikido, I promise.

I am taking bets on that at this point.

Bets to you.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

Anyone who has spent time in a certain lines of DR know the admonition about growing through the skin in a grab. They have also seen the exercise of softly maintaining skin contact. You were never meant to push through the skin-like many do in Kokyu-ho or aiki-age. You're supposed to inflate into the hand...

Just to identify which post I'm replying to...interesting. Thanks.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

(to Mike Sigman)Notice how I can be confused and not understand your point- as it sounds fishy- and yet still not insult you.
Take a hint.

This post refers both to Dan's recent interactions with Mike and to Chris' earlier skirmishes.

Having read a tremendous number of Mike's posts, I have come to some conclusions about his "intent" on the boards.

"Having a discussion" is NOT his intent.

Mike does have cross-motivations for posting.

Number One is self-aggrandizement. That forms about 90% of his intention.

80% of his intention is to belittle others.

Having both 80% of one intent and 90% of another is possible in that a tremendous amount of his self-aggrandizement comes from insulting others. A put-down of others is a boost to himself. So the self-aggrandizement and belittling actually add up to about 97% of his entire "intent" in posting.

Another 20% of Mike's intent in posting is a severe and easily understandable longing for human contact. Some of this is satisfied by people who suck up to him and want to jump on his bandwagon and he will accept that as long as one does not attempt, in any way, to imply that they agree with him because they, too, have some kind of understanding. Those meet with belittlement as severe as he gives those who dispute with him (see Chris' interactions above). But Mike enjoys the disputes as much as the sucking up because he knows that a person has to have some kind of human contact or he'll die.

And it's not that he is afraid of dying, or would even mind it, but he can't bear the idea of the great loss to the world his demise would represent!!!!

So there is how Mike combines 90%, 80% and 20% to arrive at 100%, which explains his vast powers of disputation, insult, self-glorification and long-windedness.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

David,
Will your post make this forum better? Will your post above make this thread better? Will your post suddenly change the manner Mike uses while posting?

Not likely on any of those questions and I am sure you realized that before you posted. Please reflect on your intent for making that post.

Note: Whether your post is spot on or completely off, simply does not matter. If you feel the need for communicating to Mike about what you perceive as character issues please do so via PM. Such posts have no place in a public forum and please do not cry about him being mean to you first. Please stay on topic.